Only 23% of Stimulus Will Be Spent This Year
The idea that President Obama’s stimulus bill has anything to do with stimulating the economy is a fallacy. Dear Leader told us that we had to take quick action or America would face a catastrophe. He claimed that is we didn’t act quickly America would never recover from the economic woes that would befall her. (He forgot that America once came out of a depression.) This was the reason that the stimulus bill had to be passed right away.
But this bill has only a little to do with stimulating the economy, as is proved by the fact that over 75% of the bill will not even be spent for years. Only 23% of Obama’s stimulus bill will be spent this fiscal year.
If this is truly a stimulus bill, and if Obama was telling us the truth about the impending disaster why then is less than a quarter of this bill scheduled to be spent this year? It seems that immediate required action would also require the stimulus money to be spent fairly quickly. Doesn’t it?
The answer is simple, and I have repeated it over and over again so I apologize for repeating it one more time. Because this is not a stimulus bill. Yes there are some portions of this bill designed to create work (at least short term work, not permanent long term work) but the vast majority of this bill is nothing but Democrat pet projects and Democrat entitlements. The majority of this bill is being used to implement far left agenda items that, as Rahm Emanuel is fond of saying, can be done in times of crisis where normally they could not be done. Never let a crisis go to waste.
This bill could be the biggest scam ever pulled off on the American people. To use the mortgage meltdown and recession as an excuse to scare the American people into supporting a fallacy of a stimulus bill to radicalize America is disgusting, disturbing, and reprehensible.
I can only hope that the American people wake up before the election of 2010 and realize what they, and Obama, have done. It may be too late by then to undo the fundamental changes that Obama has brought upon the country but at least if we take back either the house or senate we can limit his damage.
We have to, we have no choice.
Kelsey Grammer Claims Obama’s Stimulus Will Reward the Evil-Doers
Kelsey Grammer, my new Hollywood hero, claims that the stimulus just rewards the evil-doers. Finally someone in Hollywood has the courage to stand up and say what many Americans are thinking.
The only problem I see with the stimulus package is that, as a rule, it rewards the people that are evildoers – all of them – and that’s a problem for me, personally
And by evil-doers he is not just using the predatory lenders talking points. He is not just talking about the mortgage industry. Sure he is talking about predatory lenders, but he was also talking about the people who took out mortgages that they knew there was no way they could pay.
It may not be a popular position to take,” said Grammer, “but I honestly believe that the bill is fraught with the idea that those who did the most damage to our country – from the bottom up and the top down – are the ones that are actually going to get the most rewards
He goes on to say that it is a little confusing that the people who did the most damage to the economy are now the ones who will reap the biggest reward from the bailout while people who pay their mortgages are the good guys. He claims it is a little confusing.
I couldn’t agree more, people that work hard and pay their bills are screwed. Not only do we have to pay our bills but we will be picking up the tab for the evil-doers. We are suckers.
I’ll tell you what, unfortunately, if we’re going to be buying up bad mortgages, all the people that are paying their mortgages are the good guys,” Grammer told CNSNews.com. “It’s a little confusing, a little difficult.
“There are some people that probably shouldn’t have mortgages, but there are a lot of people that probably went ahead and took them thinking it wasn’t a big deal. So, we’re rewarding that
And we are paying for those people. The redistribution of wealth under the Obama administration continues.
Kelsey Grammer may never work again. This will probably get him black listed in Hollywood.
Eric Holder Calls the United States a Nation of Cowards
Our new Attorney General gave a speech yesterday on race relations in the United States. According to this article he had something very interesting to say about Americans.
Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards
We are a nation of cowards. At least when it comes to race. He claims that while America is “largely integrated” we still “self-segregate” on the weekends. That makes us cowards evidently.
Let’s see; Barack Obama, Condi, Colin Power, Alberto Gonzalez, Eric Holder, Clarence Thomas, and the list of minorities who have achieved greatness in this country and in government goes on and on and yet we are cowards?
When will we ever reach the point in this country where a man is judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character? We can never reach that goal as long as we have people like Eric Holder who continue to see only the darkness and refuse to step into the light and realize that Americans are, to quote Barack Obama, a decent people?
People like Eric Holder just fan the flames on whatever racial prejudices still exist. I am not stupid, I understand that there is still racism out there but America has come a long way, I do believe that most Americans judge people by what is inside and not what is outside and I get offended when I hear this kind of bullshit.
The names listed above are just a portion of the proof that if you work hard you can achieve whatever goals you may have, regardless of your color.
Eric Holder would do well to remember that even as he was calling America a nation of cowards that 17,000 courageous Americans were just ordered by President Obama to go to Afghanistan to help protect Eric Holder’s right to say something as idiotic as he said yesterday.
Republicans Warming to the Idea of Nationalizing the Banks
It appears as though some Republicans are warming up to the idea of nationalizing the banking industry. Lindsey Graham and John McCain can be seen as supporters of this socialization of American banks. An idea that the president seems to agree with.
You should not get caught up on a word [nationalisation],” he told the Financial Times in an interview. “I would argue that we cannot be ideologically a little bit pregnant. It doesn’t matter what you call it, but we can’t keep on funding these zombie banks [without gaining public control]. That’s what the Japanese did
Those words were spoken by Lindsey Graham. He claims that we are too hung up on a word. That word is “nationalization” and you are damned right I am hung up on it. He can claim that it is just a word and that I should look past it, but words have meanings and I don’t like the meaning of the word “nationalization.”
Nationalization equals socialization, and I don’t like the meaning of that word either. He has some nerve saying that Americans are getting “caught up on a word.”
It is much deeper than that. We are talking about the basic principle of free market America. We are talking about the basic principle of America, period. “Nationalization” is not just a word, it is another form of government altogether.
To say that Americans are just “getting caught up on a word” when we are talking about the fundamentals of America is disheartening. To so casually and callously refer to the idea of nationalizing the banking system just bothers the hell out of me. They can claim that it will be a temporary or a partial takeover, but it will end up being neither temporary nor partial. It never is.
I expect this from the socialists and communists on the left, but I expect Republicans to stand up in opposition of government intrusion, and yet here they are right in the middle of a discussion about nationalizing a private industry.
This is driving me insane. I just don’t know where to turn any more. I don’t know what to do. I have no representation in Washington. I am almost ready to give up, just accept it, it will be easier that way.
Roland Burris Admits He Tried to Raise Money For Rod Blagojevich
Today Senator Roland Burris, Rod Blagojevich’s pick to replace Obama’s vacant senate seat, changed his story once again, if I am counting right this is the third time he has changed his story. And this is the most damaging yet.
He is now admitting that he actually did try to raise money for Rod Blagojevich, and he did it while he was trying to acquire Obama’s vacant seat.
Here is Roland Burris’ confession:
According to Burris, the governor’s brother told him: “We need to raise some funds. We hope that you could probably get some of your friends together.”
To which Burris said he responded: “What type of money we looking for?”
Burris said the governor’s brother asked if he could raise something in the range of $10,000 to $15,000. Burris said he replied: “I don’t know, but I can’t do it now because we are in the midst of an election. Call me after the election.”
And he continued:
“So some time shortly after Obama was elected, the brother called,” Burris continued. “And now in the meantime, I’d talked to some people about trying to see if we could put a fund-raiser on. Nobody was — they said we aren’t giving money to the governor. And I said, ‘OK.’ You know, I can’t tell them what to do with their money.
“So when the (governor’s) brother called me back, I said, ‘Well, look Rob…I can’t raise any money from my friends. I said, maybe my partner and I, you can talk this over and see, could we go to some other people that we might be able to talk to that would help us out if we give — because we give a fundraiser in the law office, nobody going to show up. We’ll probably have a thousand dollars for you or something to that effect.’”
Burris’ defense before this confession was that he didn’t raise a dollar for Blagojevich, which he didn’t. However he did try to raise the money, he just couldn’t. He forgot to mention that part of the story.
I think this seals his fate and it is time for him to resign. Another corrupt Chicago politician. And the White House if full of them.
Video: Timeline Showing President Bush Warning Barney Frank About the Impending Financial Crisis in 2001
Below is a video that shows the time-line involved with the current financial crisis we are now in. The video shows us that President Bush warned of a possible crisis as early as 2001 and ratcheted up pressure on congress for reforms in 2003, these requests were ignored, leading directly to the crisis we are in today– the same crisis President Bush first warned us about in 2001.
Watch the video, we will discuss this afterward.
We have determined that President Bush warned congress in 2001 that something had to be done or there would be a meltdown, a financial crisis.
We have also determined that he pushed even harder for reforms in 2003, warning of economic disaster.
We have thirdly determined that Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer basically said “fuck you” to the president, and that Barney Frank wanted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to loan even more money to people who couldn’t afford it.
There are only three possible reasons that I can think of that would lead Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, and the rest of congress to ignore the president’s warnings.
One: they truly didn’t believe the president. They thought that he was inflating the scope of the problem. And they were actually ignorant of the possible impending crisis.
Two: They didn’t care about a possible problem because their main focus was getting their constituents into homes, even if they couldn’t afford the homes, for political reasons and just hope the crisis would pass.
Or
Three: They wanted this crisis to occur during the Bush administration knowing that they could successfully pin the blame on the man who tried to warn them eight years ago.
Judging by the success they have had with option number three that is my choice.
Obama’s Stimulus Will Allow the Sale of Personal Health-Care Records
Today President Obama signed the stimulus bill, a bill contains a $19 billion earmark to electronically centralize everyone’s personal health-care records under the new government hack office of “National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.” A bill that also prohibits the government from selling these same personal health records…except for when they can.
The stimulus bill proclaims that the sale of a person’s new centralized health-care records is strictly prohibited– right before it lists FIVE pages worth of exceptions.
Though the legislation says there is a “prohibition on sale of electronic health records or protected health information,” there are five pages of exceptions to the prohibition that include research, treatment of an individual, or a decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to waive the prohibition.
One of the exceptions to the rule is that your records could be sold for the public good, the greater good.
One exception listed in the legislation is if, “The purpose of the exchange is for public health activities.”
Private records are supposed to be private records, yet this exception states that your records could be sold for PUBLIC health reasons.
But then there is the clause that states the secretary of the new bogus government organization that I listed above can decide to just sell a person’s health records for whatever the hell reason he/she seems fit.
Another exception is rather broad saying, “The purpose of the exchange is otherwise determined by the secretary in regulations to be similarly necessary and appropriate”
For whatever reason the secretary deems appropriate a person’s personal medical information can be sold. To me that negates the whole notion of the original claim that a person’s health-care records cannot be sold. This gives the secretary of the new organization a blank check to sell anybody’s medical records for any reason.
I am not against computerizing people’s medical records, it seems much more efficient to me, but when the government starts talking about ANY reasons that makes it permissible for the government to sell my private information; then I have a problem.
This is an invasion on the right to privacy, this is unacceptable.
Oregon Proposes a 1900% Beer Tax Increase
Now that the smoking nazis have had their way with the smokers they are moving on to the next sin that needs to be taxed into oblivion, alcohol. In reality these people do not want to tax anything into oblivion, there would be no taxes to be paid if that were the end result. They just want to keep raising the taxes as high as they feel people can be pushed into paying.
Oregon is now proposing a 1900%, that is not a typo, 1900% tax increase on beer.
Four Portland legislators joined a Springfield senator to introduce Oregon House Bill 2461, which would impose a $49.61 tax on each barrel of beer produced by Oregon brewers
Naturally, as is the same with cigarettes, they are arguing that it is for the consumers own good. Because alcohol can be addicting they claim that the money will be used to combat alcoholism, but that is just the excuse. This is the same argument used for raising the taxes on cigarettes.
The truth is that if the government really gave a damn about ending a person’s nicotine or alcohol addiction they wouldn’t raise taxes on these products; they would outlaw them. The truth is also that the government knows that it can get away with taxing these products because these people are addicts. they are taking advantage of a person’s addiction to raise more revenue for the state.
How sick and perverted is that? It is criminal.
New Hampshire to Propose a “One Drink Per Hour” Law?
Cross posted on Grizzly Groundswell
Thanks to Ryan at Pro Patria for tipping me off on the following story that I somehow missed right here in my own backyard.
New Hampshire Sen. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, has introduced a bill in New Hampshire that would add the phrase “knowingly serve” to the state’s existing laws on bars and restaurants serving alcohol to either minors or people who are already drunk. This bill, which would help to protect bar and restaurant owners, has the support of both groups.
But the New Hampshire state liquor enforcement czar, Eddie Edwards, doesn’t think that this bill goes far enough. He wants more, much more. He wants to create what he calls the “safe harbor” law.
This law consists in the government regulating how many drinks a person can have while in a bar or restaurant.
Edwards’ proposal says that operators can serve one drink per hour, four at a sitting. One drink is defined as 1 ounce of spirits, 5 ounces of wine or 12 ounces of beer.
This is outrageous! It was only a matter of time though, once the smoking ban went into place this was the next logical domino to fall. And it won’t be the last, what’s next? These nanny state, I know better than you what is good for you, who’s your daddy politicians want to control every aspect of our lives. Smoking, booze, trans-fats, and on and on it goes. This is government intrusion of the worst kind. The government is continuing to extend their vile tentacles into every aspect of a person’s private life. This has to end somewhere. The government should not be in the business of protecting a person from his or her own stupidity.
I understand the dangers of drinking and driving, I understand that bars and restaurants have an obligation to make sure that people don’t become intoxicated in their places of business, I understand that it is not healthy to consume large amounts of alcohol, I understand that it is illegal to drink and drive, and I understand that this would be done for the public good.
But I also understand that there comes a time and a place where the government oversteps it’s bounds and I understand that there are times when the government intrudes and invades on people and I understand that there are times the government tries to over-ride a person’s common sense, to become a person’s brain. These nanny state politicians trully believe that the state is smarter than the individual.
This is just such case. This goes beyond protecting businesses and this goes beyond protecting the public, this is an invasion on person choices and private business rights.
Just look at this statement from this condescending son of a bitch:
Here’s the criteria — you can only consume so much alcohol,” Edwards said. “If I give you four, five drinks an hour, you should know that this makes someone intoxicated
No shit, and that is why there are laws already in place that prohibit restaurants and bars from serving intoxicated people. We don’t need the government stepping in and actually putting a number on the glasses of wine or beer that a person is allowed to drink. This is insane, this is government intrusion, this is John Lynch’s New Hampshire.
“Live Free or Die” my ass.
The true spirit of New Hampshire is already dead.
Barney Frank Claims That $50 Billion in Foreclosure Relief Isn’t Enough
We are about to spend almost $800 billion, that we don’t have, under President Obama’s stimulus package, this is on top of the $700 billion, which we also don’t have, TARP program started under President Bush.
This is only beginning, Barney Frank, who played a major role getting us into this crisis, claims that of the $50 billion in TARP funds that is designed to help people pay off mortgages they never should have had in the first place is not enough money.
I don’t think it will be enough,” said Frank. “But in fairness to Mr. Geithner, we won’t know that for a while. I believe that he will be–he’s got a good set of plans coming forward to begin to reduce foreclosures.
And so what I hope is this,” said Frank. “We will begin, if in fact, by the time we’ve used $50 billion, it turns out we can use more, then I believe the Congress would be responsive. But first they’re going to have to demonstrate the will, which they have demonstrated, and the capacity to use it effectively.”
Barney Frank of all people has some gall talking about what it is going to take to get us out of this crisis, after all he created it by forcing banks to loan money to people who weren’t qualified in the interest of being fair. And now WE have to bail them out? THAT IS NOT FAIR!
Where is this going to stop? David Axelrod says upwards of $100 billion is necessary.
Well, there’ll be a lot of aspects to this, to this program, so–but the $50 billion obviously–$50 to $100 billion that’s been discussed to date, is obviously a necessary part of it
Honest hard working Americans who pay their bills and who are doing things the right way, even though it is tough, are just suckers.
I am too frustrated to write any more about this.
